Talk:Kannada/Archive 4

Kannada is also spoken in Tamil Nadu

Among regions in which Kannada is spoken, please add Tamil Nadu also.. Tamil Nadu has a large number of Kannadigas —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandhya.darshini (talk • contribs) 15:31, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tulu script

Modern day Tulu uses Kannada script. But Tulu actually has its own script called "grantha lipi". The script used by Malayalam is directly derived from this. Also "grantha lipi" is used even to write few letters in Tamil.. i.e to write those letters for which tamil has no support —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandhya.darshini (talk • contribs) 15:33, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kannada being influenced by Samskrita

Only modern day Kannada used in literary works is influenced by Samskrita. It will still be possible to write or talk in Kannada totally without using Samskrita... it's another thing that that way is not in use.

PS: http://enguru.blogspot.com/2008/07/acca-kannada-nighamtu-mattu-kolambe.html Poets like "AnDayya" had written complete works in Kannada —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandhya.darshini (talk • contribs) 15:44, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Our script is actually follows Brahmi script. Although symbols are ours the script system is not. Around 20-30% of words we use come from Samskrita. It is ture we "can" speak in Kannada but the reality is that we do use Samskrita and that is caled 'influence'. We should state it as it is. It in no way diminishes our language but enriches it. 199.246.40.54 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:10, 15 November 2010 (UTC).[reply]

kannada letter 'wa' is featured on the wikipedia logo or the wikipedi puzzle globe , it is the clearly visible alphabet to the bottom left .

kannada letter 'wa' is featured on the wikipedia logo or the wikipedi puzzle globe , it is the clearly visible alphabet to the bottom left .kannada and devanagari are the only two indian languages to have their alphabets on the wikipedia logo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Painkiller.pint (talk • contribs) 12:43, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move per request. I have performed a history swap with the redirect.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:21, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kannada language → Kannada

The disambiguator "language" has been considered unnecessary according to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (languages) for several years already. Kannada is already a redirect and appears to have no secondary definition in English. Peter ^Isotalo 22:18, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The naming convention referred to states Convention: Languages which share their names with some other thing should be suffixed with "language". If the language's name is unique (as a noun), there is no need for any suffix. For example, English language and Persian language, but Esperanto and Latin. In this case there may be a need to disambiguate. Wikipedia has pages on Kannada literature, Kannada script, Kannada poetry, Kannada University, Kannada brahmins and Kannada Sahitya Parishat. The page at Kannada, which currently redirects to Kannada language would perhaps be better as a disambiguation page. Skinsmoke (talk) 03:50, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- All of those examples require some kind of addition to be proper topics of their own. None of them can be referred to simply as "Kannada" in English, just like Esperanto literature or Latin grammar can't be confused with Esperanto or Latin respectively. English language dictionaries confirm this (see dictionary.com and OED). The long-standing redirect to the language appears to have evoked no confusion and the issue has even been discussed at talk:Kannada (though no one seems to have thought of using the simpler title instead of the more complicated disambiguated one). Peter ^Isotalo 12:48, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Peter, sounds like a good idea. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 13:02, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support OK, you've convinced me, Skinsmoke (talk) 06:40, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

In view of this discussion, I do not understand why the page was not moved. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:33, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

About error in the Wiki Kannada Page

hi, there s a mistake in wiki kannada page. the image which indicates kannada speakers doesnot seem to include a district called KOLAR which lies very next to the state capital bengaLuru. not a piece of it. not a part of it is marked colour saying the whole part is of non kannada speakers. for your kind information, the whole malur, kolar, bangarpet, chikkaballapur(now a separate district hq) etc are a major kannada speaking areas. but since it is a border, dere is a mild influence of telugu on dese parts but it is restricted only to a limited extent. especially in malur taluk even though it shares border with tamil nadu not even 1 % of the ppl here speak or know tamil kanguage. i know this fact as i am from this place and i know very well about linguistic nature there. i dont knw from where the WIki got that image but it is not correct. if u want u can ask experts about this. but that image is false and unbearable to see. even if u r not able to replace the image, but please remove it. hope u respond to this soon regards -vishal vishalkg1156@gmail.com 'Bold text'''' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.192.99.215 (talk) 11:12, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, Vishal. The map which indicates the # of speakers has been picked from an Academic Journal. What you're stating seems to be Original Research. We only furnish content of academic nature on Wikipedia. Original Research has no place on Wikipedia. Hope that makes sense.
Signed | Aoghac2z
14:57, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

sense? nonsense s making sense here. it may make sense for some1 like you who sit somewhere in the western world and write here mr. aoghac2z, but what `ve said is not a `RESEARCH` at at all! but it is a actual fact. you said academic journal? would you please provide me the details of it? if that image is really found there, then it is done some one with ill brain and has no knowledge of the actual facts. i dunno how easily dese kinda things happen but whatever it has to be corrected. i request you. i have been referring wiki since many years for anything and every thing. as far as i know we all here rely on wiki for many things. cus i,we bleev that wiki is the great knowledge source and has got truth in its pages. whtevr arguements may happen here, but the page should look more truthful or atleast closer to the facts. hope u undrstand my concern. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.192.110.57 (talk) 03:09, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, I'd like to remind you that this is Wikipedia and it is expected of you to keep your cool and remain civil in your comments. See WP:CIVIL. You may want to refrain from using comments such as the ones you have used above. My residence in the 'western world' has no bearing whatsoever, so I request you to steer clear from passing judgments such as those (See WP:CAI). Secondly, what you are stating seems to constitute Original Research. Anyone can make random statements and then claim it to be the 'truth'. If Wikipedia starts honoring all such statements, there would be no credibility to the verifiability of content one reads here. That's precisely why Wikipedia records facts that are found only in RELIABLE SOURCES. See WP:RS. If you can corroborate your claim with a reliable source, it will be definitely accommodated on Wikipedia. The map in question here has been picked up from this source. Lastly, please sign your posts.
Signed | Aoghac2z
14:42, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aoghac2z, The image dipicting area where Kannada is spoken, is an own creation and is unsourced. I have requested citation. Even if it is from a publication it appears to be incorrect even at the first glance. Thank you. ~rAGU (talk)

On a second look up, I write to confirm that, user Tonym88 uploaded an image based on [1] but committed an error. In the Columbia.edu it clearly shows that Kannada, Telugu speaking areas overlap. Tonym88's is an incorrect reproduction and is unsourced. Therefore needs to change.

~rAGU (talk)

The image displayed on the Wiki page (the one uploaded by Tonym88) is indeed a 'self-created' image, but it is NOT unsourced. It is a mirror image of the original source which highlights the linguistic boundary outlined in this map. Any and every content on Wikipedia is a faithful reproduction of the original content found in reliable sources. The same applies to this image. Just because Tonym88's image is 'self-created', doesn't mean it lacks citation. The 'citation-needed' tag is unnecessary there. And, regarding the overlap... I see no such overlap. The original source map on columbia.edu clearly shows that the south eastern part of Karnataka state are Telugu speaking areas. If you deem this to be incorrect, please provide a reliable source that proves otherwise.
Signed | Aoghac2z
02:46, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The map which so often refer to (original source map on columbia.edu) is flawed!! Being a Tulu speaker myself, according to this map my region is over Hassan! This map is flawed. Wonder why did you not use any source of Indian origin than this imported one! Good luck. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.83.104.18 (talk) 21:47, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Link to kannada language wikipedia

I can't find it anywhere... there should be a clear link on this page to redirect visitors to the kannada wikipedia. That's what I was initially searching for... it's not even there in google results. I've been told that it's there but here it seems like it doesn't even exist. Nikhilsheth (talk) 02:17, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

jelous people

Some people are commenting on kannada langauge and some are on clasical award for kannada and some for the kannada alphabet on wikipedia logo its ridicules it shows how much they are jelous of kannada langauge.

jelous people

Some people are commenting on kannada langauge and some are on clasical award for kannada and some for the kannada alphabet on wikipedia logo its ridicules it shows how much they are jelous of kannada langauge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.193.182.58 (talk) 09:42, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

I propose that, to the extent sourced, the article Kannada radio channels be merged into this article.--Epeefleche (talk) 20:51, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And put the list of Italian radio stations in the Italian language article, and the lists of Canadian TV stations in the Canada article, etc.? Are you serious? Why? Pseudofusulina (talk) 00:49, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Or we can consider deleting it, I guess. It fails wp:v as it is. But if referenced, we do merge certain short lists into natural target articles, as a matter of course. If a page is very short and is unlikely to be expanded within a reasonable amount of time, it often makes sense to merge it with a page on a broader topic.

There is also a distinguishing factor, perhaps, in language articles vs. country articles (such as Canada articles).

This would of course help us overcome the Notability tag -- which someone applied some months ago. And avoid AfDs such as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Romanian language radio stations. --Epeefleche (talk) 01:07, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Transliteration

Hi, I am interested in India for quite a long time. I noticed something odd and I hope that here I will find the answer. Why the language name is written 'KannaDa' instead of 'KannaRa' while it sounds rather like 'r' not 'd'? The same with many other words in other Indian languages while transliterated into the Latin script. Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.74.142.188 (talk) 17:45, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's because you didn't listen correctly. English R is retroflex, so are many Indian sounds including D. --2.245.174.209 (talk) 12:55, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kannada Festival with QRpedia

Anyone know more about this festival? Victuallers (talk) 08:49, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Look of disapproval ಠ_ಠ

ಥ_ಥ ...Beautiful.

๏̯͡๏

...So we're not going to mention this in the article? Maybe it would fit in an "In popular culture" section? --98.246.156.76 (talk) 03:04, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nominate as Good Article

What more improvement needed in the article to nominate it as the Good Article Rajraowiki (talk) 08:26, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Classical languages category

An editor reverted my removal of this article from Category:Classical languages. Kannada is only recognised as a classical language by the Linguistic Experts Committee, so it should only be in Category:Classical languages of India, instead of the former category, which is for languages such as Classical Sanskrit and Classical Latin, that are recognised as classical by sources internationally. Classical Kannada would be in the category, but is no article on that subject now. --Joshua Issac (talk) 09:20, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Letter from Dr.George Hart regarding Kannada getting classical status by deceit

Sirs:

I read with dismay that Kannada is to be recognized as a classical language. Like French, English, and German, Kannada is a rich and worthy language. But India has only two true indigenous classical languages -- Sanskrit and Tamil, each of which is considerably older than the other Indian languages and has an independent literary tradition. Tamil, not known as well as it should be in the rest of India, has an early literature that is entirely independent of Sanskrit, both in its literary forms and its vocabulary. This is not true of Kannada, whose earliest writings are deeply indebted to and imitative of Sanskrit. The earliest work in the language is Kaviraajamaarga, whose title and content are entirely based on Sanskrit. Kannada does not satisfy two of the criteria listed by the Government of India for a classical language. First, it is not 1500 years old. The fact that a Kannada dialect may have possibly influenced some Tamil form hardly means it has texts 1500 years old. Nor is it possible to claim that its literary tradition is original. Unlike that of Tamil, which is genuinely original, the Kannada tradition follows Sanskrit quite faithfully. It is not original by any stretch of the imagination. A comparison of Kavirajamarga with the Tolkappiyam would make this point perfectly clear. The Kannada scholars feel they have achieved a victory, no doubt, but in reality all they have accomplished is to foist on the world and on Kannada speakers themselves a myth. To ignore the true richness of one's language and to base one's appreciation of it on a falsehood does no one any good. The study of language and literature in India is highly political -- Kannada is hardly the only language that suffers from this situation.

Sincerely, George Hart — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.101.242.92 (talk) 20:34, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We first need published sources before we can evaluate your claims. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:16, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kannada language materials

https://archive.org/details/abdamaidarpaa00kirjuoft

https://archive.org/details/grammarofkannada00kittuoft

https://archive.org/details/kannadaenglishsc00buchrich

https://archive.org/details/cu31924080897410

https://archive.org/details/kannadabadagakur00brit

https://archive.org/details/catalogueofkanna00brituoft

Rajmaan (talk) 00:46, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Translation help request

Hi,

I'm looking for an editor or editors of the Kannada Wikipedia, to translate some chemistry-related articles from English into Kannada. Would anyone be interested? I may be able to put you in touch with Kannada -speaking chemists who can help with technical terms. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:01, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Kannada/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

This is a very good article with good material and excellent references. I believe it could be assessed at a higher rating with a relatively small amount of work. The biggest thing lacking is a proper prioritization of the space devoted tot he various subtopics. For example the history and development material is great, but it is too long for the main article on Kannada, and instead should be summarized here with all the detail moved to a daughter article per WP:SS. Then that would leave space to flesh out the other important facets of the topic. Look around at the best other language articles and try to consider what are the most important facets of a language and allocate space based on which are most important. Based on that I gave it a B rating, but it could soon go higher as mentioned. - Taxman ^Talk 14:27, 4 September 2007 (UTC) I think it is time up give a better grade for this page! And this page needs a correction: Karnataka has a population of 55 million of which atleast 50 million people speak kannada(including Konkani, Kodava,Tulu and Havyak speakers)... please update —Preceding unsigned comment added by Was2 (talk • contribs) 12:55, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 14:05, 11 March 2015 (UTC). Substituted at 20:38, 3 May 2016 (UTC)